About your Search

20121112
20121120
STATION
CSPAN 6
CNBC 4
CNN 3
CNNW 3
CSPAN2 2
FBC 1
MSNBC 1
MSNBCW 1
LANGUAGE
English 24
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)
of those things need to be in play. when john boehner talks about raising revenue he's willing to do that if it only comes in the form of tax reform, not raising tax rates, but actually lore erring tax rates, closing loopholes, broadening the base and you will get more money coming into the treasury. the other part of the equation that is so important which has not been part of the public conversation is cutting spending, not just slowing the rate of growth but actually cutting spending to try to get this deficit under control. i know the republicans don't control the narrative on this but i want to hear more from them on that side of the equation. jon: julie our nodding your head you must agree. >> i think both sides need to come to the table. enough already with these sort of, you know, showmanship, game man ship, these are people's lives that are at stake in this economy. monica is right in that the president does control the upper hand at this point. if nothing is done all the bush tax rates will expire. you have exit polling coming out of the recent election saying two-thirds of
. rich: they are not offering very many specifics this early on. we do have a ways to go. john boehner did offer framework. the framework would have tax and entitlement targets, revenue targets, spending targets, that this year in the next couple months. congress would work out the details in 2013. both leaders from both parties and both houses say it is time to get to work. >> we will continue to have revenue on the table. we are serious. we are serious about cutting spending and solving our fiscal problems. >> we will do it now. we feel very comfortable with each other. this is not something we will wait until the last day of december to get it done. rich: they met for a little longer than an hour here at the white house. much of the talk was positive. there really is not anything close to specifics right now coming from anyone in all of this. here he read and nancy pelosi really did not mention entitlement at all. rich o'connell highlighted the fact that his conference in the senate believes that this country does not have a taxing problem, it has a spending problem. there are still
's about to happen in this building in an hour from now. speaker boehner, senator mcconnell, senator reid, democratic leader pelosi, all will come here and speak for a couple hours. day one of negotiations. nobody is expecting huge news but as jim has already tweeted out this morning, the market is going to look for signs that this tone of compromise that we've heard so much about all week long is that for real or are talks going to break down in early stages? the market specifically is going to depend on that tone today and we'll bring that live when the meeting happens a little after 10:00 a.m. >> we've seen reaction of futures to the possibility of a deal. we've been down for six of the past seven days but the dow this morning implied open is up 33 points. sapp looks s&p looks to add fiv. here we have italy down three-quarter percent and mixed bag for the rest. carl? okay. we're going to go to the road map this morning. that is where carl is in washington d.c. reports this morning that hard decisions surrounding deficit reduction could be kicked down the road until 2013 in favor of a s
from john boehner and -- >> yeah, from boehner i am. the president has now painted himself -- painted those guys in to -- how many times has he drawn a line in the sand about that high right on 250. he's made a point and he can't possibly go back on that now, can he? >> i think he can. look, i think he's drawing a line on getting money from those people, there people making 250 and above. but he hasn't drawn a line on how he gets that money. he's said at his news conference i'm skeptical that you can do enough in loopholes and exclusions to get the money that we need for a deal from that group. but he also said i'm open to new ideas. so if there is in fact an effort to close some loopholes that gets you some of the way there, you can certainly see the president, i could anyway, compromising somewhere between 35 and 39.6 on a slightly higher rate. if shall be caomebody came up w source of revenue which didn't change the distribution of the tax burden, figure out a way to do it without a top rate. i kind of expect what's going to happen is loophole closing and you end up at like 37 ors
that can be had. i think both the president and speaker boehner have indicated they're willing to give that a shot. >> thank you, gentlemen. good to see both of you and thanks for your work on behalf of the american people. congressman steve nortorette of ohio and congressman john ridgelle from virginia. >>> well, it could still push this economy over the edge. what president obama can do in his second term, next. is, nyquil doesn't unstuff your nose. what? [ male announcer ] it doesn't have a decongestant. no way. [ male announcer ] sorry. alka-seltzer plus fights your worst cold symptoms plus has a fast acting decongestant to relieve your stuffy nose. [ sighs ] thanks! [ male announcer ] you're welcome. that's the cold truth! [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus. ♪ oh what a relief it is! ♪ [ male announcer ] to learn more about the cold truth and save $1 visit alka-seltzer on facebook. we have so much technology in our store to really show the customers what's going on with their bodies. now you can feel what happens as we raise your sleep number setting and allow the bed to con
with boehner. but might be the beginning of bargain point. but you get 820 billion. so there's another 800 billion. at this point, the others are saying no cuts to medicare, social security, or anything else. and they have to find another 800 billion. >> the president did not say -- >> we know he has to cut some of those. >> my guess is the gop is saying they're looking at a trillion dollars as the number. >> and you saw what paul ryan said. the house was re-elected. so people re-elected those people in the house for a reason. it's a nonstarter. it's not going to happen. it's not going to be 1.6 billion. 1.6 trillion. to get to four trillion, that would be 2.4. so we said that. he'll go not 3-1 like simpson bowles. he's go one and a half to one. >> that's not going to happen either. >> but what bothers me -- >> the problem is nothing is going to happen. >> what bothers me is i do think you can get to a point where you raise taxes too much and you don't cut spending enough, where you're just funding entitlements by raising taxes and you don't do anything about it. if he had his way, i reall
and the ongoing relationship with boehner and mcconnell because he's going to have to be a different kind of leader with them. he talked about it in the press conference a bit the other day. he needs to reach out to them the way he's reached out to people on staten island and dealt with the two governors, christie and cuomo, who are two pretty demanding guys as well. and based on their public and private comments have been very happy with the president's leadership and his government. >> i just wonder if it's fair to make a parallel when you look at the president's response to sandy which has had and continues to have just devastating effects on the economy for businesses and the reaction to the bp oil spill which seemed slow in coming because that was devastating as well to a different part of the country. >> he certainly was. he was very slow to respond to people in the gulf coast. >> in terms of appearances. >> i think things have changed, though, over the past couple years. and i suspect that, you know, even the president's closest allies will say that it was a very hard adjustment go
connell and john boehner's people sort of drawing their lines in the sand. that's not really happening even though that is sort of by far much sort of bigger story as far as what's going to happen in the country. as far as -- and priority list for both the white house and congress. >> do you think they also get that at the white house? that as long as -- as much as they may be getting hurt or not by the islamist people are talking about benghazi, it enables some room for the white house to get involved in the negotiations as well. >> it allows them to negotiate this without sort of a spotlight on fiscal cliff story which is -- you know, a story that has about six weeks left in it before some -- before taxes go up on everyone and significant spending cuts happen across the country. not just the military. >> you've been covering the hill for awhile in addition to the campaigns. do you get the sense that this will be the time when they say okay, they've reached some agreement on the tax out on the revenue side and republicans eat i
that we've seen since the election, whether it's from the president or the house speaker john boehner, but i can tell you in talking to sources privately on both sides of the aisle, they admit that it's all about positioning and posturing to make sure at the end of the day if we do go off the fiscal cliff that they're not blamed for it. they're the ones who looked reasonable, not unreasonable, and they're preparing for the other side to blame them for the opposite, if that makes sense. that's a lot of what you are saying in public. the reality is that neither side has a really clear machine date or clear vote and no one wants to look at the end of the day like they never gave compromise a chance. listen to republican bob corker, though, because there does seem to be a little bit of a crack on the republican side on whether or not it's okay to raise some taxes. >> i think there is a deal. the ying and yang is we know there has to be revenues, and i think -- look, i haven't met a wealthy republican or democrat in tennessee that's not willing to contribute more as long as they know we so
, speaker boehner had pushed at the urging of many of us and invited prime minister netanyahu and gave the best speech here in congress. it helps when a nation's enemy sees an ally siding with them. on the other hand, when a nation's enemy sees a strong ally, the united states, turning on an ally as this administration had with president mubarak and people wanting to see israel gone from the map, take power. it encourages israel's enemies. this administration also had relations with gaddafi. he had blood on his hands from prior years. not a good man. but he had opened up his country, aban dopped any nuclear weapons pursuits -- abandoned any nuclear weapons pursuits and became an ally. i have seen individual family members of gaddafi here in washington to meet with administration officials and lo and be hold, year and a half or so ago, this administration sides with the enemies and at the time, we knew al qaeda was contained within the revolt and we sided with the al qaeda-backed revolt to drive out gaddafi. that appears to have inspired the violence in tunisia. so we have seen israel's
think they've already agreed to that. you heard john boehner say that already. we've had voteses in the senate where we've gotten rid of tax credits. i think that's a given. and i think that the vast majority of measures agree with that. the question is how do you do that and how do you allow taxes to rise at the same time you fix the real problem and that's uncontrolled entitlement spending and a government that has grown massively. >> i think if the house stands for anything, it's cut government spending as tom coburn said and i think we'll have to do more of it. we heard the mandate in 2010 where it was a clear mandate cut spending and we did, we cut $900 billion in spending that he can't like painful tos us. >> we'll continue our call to rise bol politics and make a deal. oufr guests this morning include mike jackson and also david zaslav. and the head of maris group. and douglas holtz-eakin. >> let's talk about eurozone finance ministers meeting to discuss whether to release a new tranche of fund to go greece. the leaders are not expected it to okay the funding despite greec
says he wants to see higher tax rates. john vitter says axel in not. >> -- john boehner says clearly not. >> it is a lot easier to say at this level of generality. it becomes harder to enacted. the number of times of with the head of the cbo, senator so and so would call me up and say i want to talk about tax reform and i would walk in and the head is one talking point which is brought in the base and lower the rate. what are you willing to scale back? mortgage interest, cannot touch that. charitable, cannot touch that. you go down the list. one of the reasons of these new ideas being attractive is a are obscuring what has to be cut back. >> there is still a hard choice there. >> we are not saying we are going to cut out your ability to deduct your mortgage but i will get to keep my ability to deduct my local tax. everything goes into a pot. everybody gets to keep their deductions but you cannot be too greedy about it. it does have to limit the amount they can benefit from it. >> that is the selling point. >> the notion here, can you do this and have the only effect of the wealthiest
coming together, and boehner used the term "comprehensive immigration reform," and so the prospects are better than they were certainly before the election, and they look better than they had. with regards to mexico, i personally don't think there's any issue that is more important for the quality of the relationship at this point. it's one of those issues that is behind sens, whatever issue one's talking about, you know, for many in mexico, not just u.s. immigration policy annoying and irritating, but offensive, the fence, the walling in, the way imgrants, largely mexican communities are talked about, and this would, if there is a policy shift in any major way, i think, would have an important impact. more as important, however, i think if one looks at the immigration issue, and i'm not going to go into details now, but it's also an economic issue. i mean, immigration and manuel will probably talk a little about that as well, but in other words, just the fact is that if you can bring 6 million mexicans out of the shadows and pried some legal status to them, they should earn more mo
week. host: "the baltimore sun" has a story, "boehner ways next moves." this is from "the wall street journal." "post office hint of gop path." host: "she fit a profile." so, more on leadership, which both sides will be voting for this week when they return to washington on who will be their leaders. so, we will continue to watch that story for u.s. well. part of the mix to avoid the fiscal cliff is these jobless benefits. that is the headline in the politics and policy section of "the washington post." "over 2 million americans could lose their jobless benefits before the end of the year." host: susan, michigan, what do you think? should we cut medicare and social security? caller: absolutely not. absolutely not. host: why not? caller: i am a woman who has finally reached the age of social security. all the years the work, this money was taken out of my paycheck. i was told from a very young age that when i reached a fine age of the period where you retire and you can get social security, that all the money that i paid in would be refunded to me. this money is not to be touched, not
john boehner, eric cantor who will stay on with those rules that have had since 2011 when republicans took control of the house. in terms of strategy and approach, we are dealing with the same players we were dealing with before the election. host: turning toward the senate, what is the news there? caller: a lot of the same there as well. the republicans and democrats met yesterday morning behind closed doors and basically reelected the same leaders should have said for some time now. harry reid on the democratic side. on the republican side of mitch mcconnell and john corn and who is coming off of two cycles on the republican campaign committee. he will be replacing john kyl who is retiring. another couple of people down the ladder were reelected. there was an opening for for the campaign committee slot. thank you for talking with us. our question this morning is your level of confidence in the white house national security team. let's hear from carrie from michigan. caller: good morning. can you hear me? i think this is another cover up for the republican party. look at what condole
republicans. listen who what house speaker john boehner said about that throwing cold water on it. >> at this point i think that the standing committees of the house whether they be the oversight committee or the intelligence committee are working diligently on these issues, and at this point i think that's appropriate. >> now, what john mccain and his colleagues are arguing is that there's too much stove piping going on. there are too many committees, and twoul today is a good example. there are hearings going on all over capitol hill and then probably will continue to be. they think it all should be streamlined into one committee, but, suzanne, using the term watergate, using the term coverup, saying what did he know, when did he know it, talking about the president, not exactly a way to get bipartisan support for something that, you know, democrats clearly don't want. it is absolutely -- you mentioned at the beginning, very, very tense, particularly between these two old rivals, john mccain and president obama. >> not the way to bite -- get the bipartisanship going. okay, dana.
for governor romney, i worked for john boehner. i called up our didge cal -- digital guy and said tell me about twitter and he said you don't need to know that. that is not going to take off. so much of what we did was driven from the bottom up through twitter. even when toivens plane, we would go -- even when i was on the plane, jen was on a much bigger plane called air force 1. i was on hairforce 1. by the time i came back to the front of the plane i would see on twitter i already made news. >> when you say people, you don't mean people. you mean reporters. >> or people. [laughter] >>that was on the -- free to be you and me c.d. reporters are people. but this was kind of backstage conversation you were watching play out on twitter. sometimes real people. it was more important for you how the journalists were using twitter. >> it became an incredible newsing a gator. you could see now like t.p.m. more left leaning. see what they are saying. see what folks on the right are saying. folks in the middle are supposed to be saying. what the outside groups are saying and you sort of got a good snapsh
speaker boehner, majority leader cantor, majority whip mccarthy, democratic leader pelosi, democratic whip hoyer, house foreign affairs committee chairwoman ileana ros-lehtinen, and ranking member, mr. berman of california, as well as mr. levin who has been so very helpful on the ways and means committee for all their support in drafting the bill under consideration by the house this week. it has been a pleasure to work with all these individuals. mr. speaker, as i have said i believe the magnitsky provisions are strong, flexible enough to be well implemented, and allow us to have a cooperative relationship with russia on trade and other issues while holding human rights violators, including those responsible for the brutal treatment and death of sergei magnitsky accountable. as i stated earlier i would not be supporting pntr for the russian federation if this bill did not include the sergei magnitsky rule of law accountability act. mr. speaker, i agree with what has been said about the importance of increased trade in terms of promoting more positive reforms in countries like russia, but
it off track when there were in fact very close. i think boehner has been very clear. i think revenues are on the table. they are at the moment drawing a line on tax rates, but we will see where that goes. the last time, you are right, didn't work and we were not facing quite the same set of circumstances we are facing today so i'm cautiously optimistic although i will offer to say lastly that people sometimes say okay, it looks like simpson-bowles, everything in between zero and $4 trillion we could end up with all kinds of outcomes that may be less than i would like and maybe less than all of you would like but at least something. i'm hoping it is more over here but i don't know. >> and steve, so we are gathered here to talk about u.s. global competitiveness. how important is resolving these issues to the american position on the global economy? >> first of all i think it's important not just our position in the global comment about our position in the world. admiral mullen who was the previous chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said our greatest national security threat was our f
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)